It is difficult to persuade those of the “mathematical establishment” that Wiles’ alleged “proof” ( of 1995) of Fermat’s Last Theorem (FLT) is wrong.It is the same as persuading 100 “critics” who awarded an Oscar a Hollywood junk-movie (such as “Death Becomes Her”, in 1992, a movie even more stupid and embarrassing than the “marvelous” scene of Meryl Streep “admiring” her ass after her head had been twisted backward) to change their minds and vote movies such as “The Passion of Joan of Arc”. Impossible! One who likes “Death Becomes Her” cannot admire a masterpiece such as “The Passion of Joan of Arc”. Anyway, I read here that Marilyn tried to show why Wiles was in error, although in a sort of “informal” (without equations or mathematical formulas) way. I published these days a new proof against Wiles’ work, https://www.academia.edu/34326285/ where I showed that FLT can be proved through Cauchy successions (basic mathematical analysis) and the main postulates of QM (Quantum Mechanics).What I published can be written also in 1 page, because it takes only six passages (and surely could be the “solution” that Fermat was envisaging, without disclosing it, although it is difficult to understand now what Fermat had in his mind)

1) You take the sum of 3 positive integers (Z) of FLTan + bn = cn

2) Then turn the 3 numbers into an equivalent sum of two rational Q numbers yielding 1, by dividing all the 3 integers by cn , (a/c) n + (b/c) n = 1

3) then convert this new sum into another equivalent sum of two R numbers, (such as 3/5 = 0.6)

5) This is the sum of 2 Cauchy-converging successions, tending to 0, when p is tending to infinity, and this is equivalent to the sum of 2 elementary trigonometric functions

( sin α) n + (cos α) n = 1

whose sum is simply a well-known Cauchy succession tending to 0 (in the domain [ 0,1]), where we can easily find the two elementary trigonometric functions ( sinα )n and (cosα )n as the only ones whose sum – only when raised to 2 – is yielding 1, thereby fully satisfying the assumptions of FLT.

6) I proved also that this equivalence between

( sin α) n + (cos α) n = 1andan + bn = cn

is confirmed also by physics and QM; and by the famous equation of square integration of modules of observable quantities

||Ψ1||2 + ||Ψ2||2 = 1

And finally, do you want to know in a few words (if you read my paper it is proved in 9-10 pages) why Wiles’ “proof” is wrong?First of all because he tried to prove the FLT (which is entirely based on a quadric assumption analogous to that of Pythagorean theorem) through the elliptical functions such as y² = x ( x – A) ( x + B), that are cubic functions. From a topological standpoint there is a total incompatibility between quadric functions (which can parametrize just spheres) and elliptical functions, (which can parametrize just tori )

The point is that FLT can be proved in different ways, but unfortunately Wiles proof is a non-proof , totally wrong in several respects. They supported Wiles for the same reason by which they supported the false “proof” of “gravitational waves” last year, and for the same reason why Hollywood awarded junk-movies such as “Death Becomes Her” = because they wanted to make money by giving prizes only to someone of their own establishment.